There was a time when people heated debates about the dates on which rulers were crowned or battles were fought. Generally, history was synonymous with dates. History is certainly about changes that occur over time. It is about finding out how things were in the past and how things have changed. As soon as we compare the past with the present we refer to time, we talk of “before” and “after”. What is the problem with the periodisation of Indian history that James Mill offers? Although Hinduism is the religion of most of the Indians but Muslims had been living in India from much earlier than beginning of the Islamic rule in India. Even during the peak of the Mughal Empire, there were many territories which were ruled by Hindu kings. James Mill divided history on the basis of religion of the rulers of the times. However, a variety of faiths existed simultaneously in these periods. Mill, through his periodization suggested that British rule could civilize India. He thought that British should conquer all the territories in India to ensure the enlightenment as if India was not capable of progress without British coordination. Why did the British preserve official documents? Official records of the British administration serve as important source of history of this period. The British rulers believed that every instruction, plan, policy, decision, agreement, investigation should be clearly written up. This was necessary for proper study and debate about an issue. Hence, they carefully preserved all official records and created several archives for the purpose. How will the information historians get from old newspapers be different from that found in police reports? A police report may give a version which was suited to the rulers of that time. A newspaper may project a different story. Projection in newspaper depends on the leaning of the newspaper towards a particular powerful group in the contemporary period.